Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UK ISPs To Start Tracking Your Surfing To Serve You Ads

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the weak-anonymizers-and-other-fun-party-tricks dept.

TechDirt has an interesting article about a UK-based company that is trying to work with ISPs to make use of user surfing data to serve targeted ads. "Late last year, we heard about a company that was trying to work with ISPs to make use of that data themselves to insert their own ads based on your surfing history -- and now we've got the first report of some big ISPs moving into this realm. Over in the UK three big ISPs, BT, Carphone Warehouse and Virgin Media have announced plans to use your clickstream data to insert relevant ads as you surf through a new startup called Phorm."

10 of 238 comments (clear)

  1. hmm by RMH101 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So it's bad when ISPs do this, but OK when Google does it?

    1. Re:hmm by N7DR · · Score: 5, Informative
      So it's bad when ISPs do this, but OK when Google does it?

      Yes. It's part of the data returned by Google. The ISP has to snoop the data stream and insert its own traffic into it.

      ISPs should be forbidden from altering the data stream unless they own the content that's being transferred.

    2. Re:hmm by rolfwind · · Score: 5, Informative

      I can CHOOSE to use google to surf the net. There are many search engines. I can also use Tor to access Google anonymously if I'm paranoid.

      My ISP choices are limited, and I can't change them as fast as a search engine either. Plus once I click onto a site, google pretty much loose track where I am, especially if I block ads.

      ISP can know every place I go.

      Moreover, I don't pay google to use their service. I do pay an ISP. They have an revenue stream.

      So I think your analogy is flawed.

    3. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No, I don't think so. Transparently altering data is permissible according to RFC 2616 (the HTTP specification) unless you include the Cache-Control: no-transform header, which virtually nobody has ever heard of. Thus, if intermediate alteration is part of the protocol you are using and you haven't availed yourself of the opportunity to deny that action, it can be argued that the permission is implicitly granted, just the same way it's implicitly granted that they can cache it at all.

  2. ISPUK apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    does this not break privacy laws? for that matter, why can an ISP snoop on what you're doign when the government can not?

    1. Re:ISPUK apparently by glesga_kiss · · Score: 5, Informative

      does this not break privacy laws?

      I think so! Under my understanding of the UK Data Protection Act (IANAL), this would have to be an opt-in scheme via a tick box on the contract. It used to be opt-out but this was changed.

      Under the terms of the law an organization may not share personal data to another party without your consent. It's a pretty decent law, I don't know how the hell it got passed.

  3. So who's paying the extra bsandwidth used? by trolltalk.com · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After all, if your ISP is serving you ads you don't want, they shouldn't be charging you the bandwidth used ...

    --
    Kevin Smith on Prince
  4. nice by R3N3G4D3 · · Score: 5, Funny

    so now my family can enjoy the advertisements based on the porn I was watching earlier that week?

  5. Porn ads? by PIPBoy3000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    So if my wife starts getting a lot of ads for porn, do you think she'll put two and two together?

  6. Mmm bad summary? by saikou · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When people say "Insert relevant ads" it usually means ISP hacked the page you got from remote server and inserted and ad that wasn't there, or replaced one on the page with something else. Bad thing. Here, they organize new ad platform. Any site that uses it will be showing something Phorm servs up, and it, in turn, will try to figure out what to show by using ALL of your surfing history, no matter what sites you visit. So, if you go to golf sites A, B, C (that serve ads via yahoo, for example), and then to Phorm-using site M that has articles on electronics, site M will show you golf ads, due to your click-stream.

    Of course advertisers will be disappointed to find out, that many people actually use one connection for a household. So, while from the point of view of ISP user clicked Cooking A, Cooking B, Valentine's day, Heavy metal band, Banking, Myspace ... in reality it's 2-3-4 individual users. And showing wife an ad for a new heavy album won't make CTR go through the roof. And teenager might actually barf at the sight of the cooking ads.

    p.s. ISPs sell the data anyways, not usre how this opt-out would work...

    --
    Hyperom.com